Help, help! The incels are being oppressed (again). Let us look into the Braincels subreddit to see exactly how:

Here’s the text for old people like me who don’t like squinting at screenshots:

Attractive men are the WOMEN of the male gender (self.Braincels)

submitted 1 day ago by Throwaway1337145317 Blackpill Diplomat

Ugly men are held to a higher standard and increased level of accountability. People are more callous towards them and don’t go out of their way to do them any favours. They go through life devoid of any social luxury, an ugly man must earn respect in every sphere. It will never be given without effort on his part. He must go to even greater lengths to secure a partner (it’s possible just unreasonably steep) while attractive men are basically handed it. Correspondingly people are instinctively kinder and more affable to good-looking men, merely for existing. They may [have?] it harder than women, but we exist in an entirely different dimension.

If you’re proud of being a man, you can wear this as a badge of honour. You are the true men, especially if the weight of the world hasn’t broken your back.

So here our incel friend has taken a nugget of truth and covered it in a big pile of bullshit. It’s true that in many ways conventionally attractive people have it easier. A piece in The Cut sums up some of the advantages hotties have:

Harvard economist Markus Mobius and Wesleyan University economist Tanya Rosenblat published the seminal paper “Why Beauty Matters” in 1994. They found that in three different samples of workers, more attractive people consistently earned 12 to 14 percent more than unattractive people — regardless of gender — with evidence that the “labor market sorts the best-looking people into occupations where their looks are productive.” To that end, a 2012 paper found that comely real estate brokers outperformed homely colleagues. More uncomfortably, first- and sixth-graders think attractive teachers are kinder and happier, and college students thought that attractive professors were clearer, more helpful, and of higher overall quality.

Hotties tend to be happier as well, but the reason for this happiness varies by gender. Hot dudes are happier because, as hot dudes, they tend to earn more; hot women are happier because, well, they’re hot.

And while being hot can help you get dates — yes, incels, it’s true — being intimidatingly hot can make it harder because your insanely good looks may, well, intimidate potential dates, according to an OK Cupid study.

The trouble comes when you take these truths and stick them in an incel’s brain they come out thinking that only men suffer from being ugly and that basically all women go through life on easy mode.

And of course virtually all incels are convinced all of their own problems stem from the alleged facts that they’re hideously ugly and that women only want Chads. (Never mind that most of the time I’ve seen incels post pics of themselves they look … basically average and that the Chad thing is as ridiculous as the name Chad.)

When a couple of non-incels challenged Mr. Throwaway1337145317, he quickly defeated them (in his mind at least) with a one-two punch of ass-facts and ass-logic.

Here’s the text:

alfons100 4 points 1 day ago

whatThrowaway1337145317 Blackpill Diplomat[S] 9 points 1 day ago

It’s a commonly accepted position that women are treated more leniently than men by society at large. I’m extrapolating that to include the different types of men that exist. Ugly men are treated even more harshly and with less tact than their attractive counterparts.

[–]saltpsychology -2 points 1 day ago

What do you think the implications of this are for ugly women?

[–]Throwaway1337145317 Blackpill Diplomat [S] 5 points 1 day ago

Slightly harsher treatment than their average-looking counterparts, but overall protected by the overarching “woman’s code”. The mere fact that women can complain and be listened to in earnest is such an amazing privilege. I can’t complain because this is a prison we men have built for ourselves. Hopefully we eventually get around to it’s demolition.

The notion that women who are considered ugly don’t really have it that bad is basically incel dogma. Here’s another incel mansplaining this “fact” to a self-described ugly incel … woman in a different Braincels thread:

And the text:

Toolman890 11 points 2 months ago

yes ugly and fat women not only get relationships far easier than average to ugly men, but they also reap the benefits of being a female in the relationship, unlike men. in fact it is so easy that now even the average woman is fat because they don’t have to stay in shape anymore. they get everything without effort so we now see a trend of so many young women looking out of shape to chubby to outright fat.

This is the sort of thing that incels talk about when they’re not yelling about “roasties” and “cucks” and “femoid whores” or building little shrines to Elliot Rodger.

Comments

At 17 minute mark he talks about incel. At 16 minute mark he leads up to it. He says most Asian guys in the US are incel. He says they are “naturally incel” and part of it has to do with how Asians are portrayed in tv shows and films. The interviewer says the trajectory is PUA to Mgtow to Incel.

So, unless most asian men in the states say they are incel, I would say they are not. Since ‘incel’ is not a status of a person (having sex/not having sex but wanting to) but rather a group that one needs to actually opt in to.

Not listening to the video (at work) just going off of what you said about it.

Manosphere Crime Show? Where they investigate the crimes of MRAs, incels, MGTOWS and others?
And they didn’t call it Misogynoir? That’s such a shame.

Better they didn’t. Misogynoir is used in African American culture to mean “black misogyny”.
We all know how whites loves to appropriate cultures of color but they need to research more before they do so. “Woke”, “Based”, etc are all used by white nationalists and the alt right (in addition to everyone else) as if they created those terms. And they think they did, just go on any of their forums and ask them what those terms mean and from where they originated and see the answers you get.

That piece about the “sexual revolution”.

*This ‘women have no sexuality (or even a sexual orientation)’ dogma was (and still is) repeated within psychology/sexology as well, ref the DSM and sexual paraphilias. James Cantor, well known sexologist stated that ‘women need a reason for sex, men just need a place’ and the dying (and weird) dogma that all women are bisexual, while all men are heterosexual (except for gay men who all have ‘feminised’ brains).

Gag. Where did that tired trope about womens’ sexuality being “more fluid” than men’s originate from? I seem to recall it becoming popular around the time men started asking women to kiss other women in front of them because “so hawt”.

The Spectator has been pushing this line, from 2017:
“The consequence of this new sexual counter-revolution? No sex at all
‘Feminism’ isn’t producing guides for helping men. It is producing manifestos for torturing them”
“A new generation is being encouraged to redraw the lines of acceptability in a way that goes too far. What once was gauche has now become unacceptable. And from unacceptable it is being made sackable and then elided with the criminal. That is a long way to go in a very short time.
When the sexual revolution began in the 1960s it reframed sexuality in the direction of greater freedom and licence. But for all the good that movement did, who wishes it hadn’t been more thought through?
At the most extreme end, the pro-paedophilia groups which fixed themselves among the gay and women’s rights movement …..”.Note what they are really doing is attacking the whole idea of women’s sexual consent. The ‘traditional’ idea was that women had no right to consent, pre marriage they were not supposed to have any sex at all, post marriage they had no right to refuse sex.
The implied message they give is that ‘these incels all got sex back in the past because women were forced into marriage and then had no choice. But this was a good thing, because it meant that men got all the sex they wanted’. Women were never considered at all in all of this except as sexual commodities.

Lisa I get your point. The Sexual Revolution in tandem with the Womens’ Liberation Movement, made strides for womens’ sexual freedoms. But only in tandem with the WLM. There were also “advances” in sexual freedom (for men) that did not equate to freedom for women or anyone else. So the guy who wrote that piece is bemoaning that women are not “free” now to have sex with any guy who wants it from them. They are actually setting boundaries and saying no, whereas in his mind, back during the Sex Rev days, they would’ve been freer and less prudish or less hung up on choice or their own preferences. The atmosphere of the free love Sex Rev 70s would’ve acted as a sort of pressure for them to prove that they were “liberated” and incels would have benefitted. So now that they really DO have freedom to choose, and they are not choosing incels (or maybe the author of the piece), well that doesn’t bode well.

So to this guy sexual liberation is fine as long as it means women have to be “liberated” from their own partner preferences.

The part about the Sex Rev and pedophilia, yeah that was there. And guess who pushed that? MEN.

why you never reply to people who call out your problematic stuff? Alan made a very good reply to you about Everest. Kupo and Rhuu both made good points, and oogly too about your racism. and of course, Scild! all you do is ignore things you can’t answer and make long posts that are strange and irrelevant and often problematic in lots of ways. but you don’t adress when people call you out. if it is not troll behaviour – certainly it is quite ignorant.

Misogynoir is used in the African American culture to mean “black misogyny”

No it isn’t. It’s a term used by womanists et al to describe the double whammy of misogyny + racism endured by black women. Nothing to do with misogyny coming from the black community at all. I’m the whitiest white boy what ever whited, and even I know that.

By someone who dropped a video into a conversation to clarify something they said instead of actually, you know, clarifying – and then getting angry and re-posting the link when we said we didn’t want to wade through a video to get a point that should be no more than a sentence or two.

By someone who was on moderation a few days ago for dropping horrible grossout-bombs into conversations about terrible misogynists, all of them some variety of Hindu. I specifically responded by saying “hey, talk with us and not at us,” and got the response of “Sorry, I’m too busy to listen to you.”

What does “braincel” actually mean? Is it supposed to indicate that the person is too smart to get laid? Not smart enough? Are they actual zombies with no brains at all? @.@ The things that these guys come up with…

I think it means too smart. Because nerdiness and intelligence gets inflated. Especially by them. Okay, a lot nerds are smart. But that doesn’t mean everyone who is socially awkward and likes geeky stuff is a brainiac and it doesn’t mean everyone who is conventionally attractive or athletic is stupid. But, popular culture likes to tell us that nerdy = smart and pretty = dumb. We all know that the manosphere gets most of its information about how the world works from sitcoms and teen movies.

Side note: I’ve noticed that a lot of aggrieved white male nerdy types are soooo offended by The Big Bang Theory for not representing nerds properly. Yet, those same guys always think the world works like BBT. That is the nerdy = smart/right about everything and pretty = stupid trope is absolutely accurate and misogynistic entitlement to women’s bodies is cute and non-threatening as long as it’s a nerd engaging in the behavior. Also, BBT has a lot of bad evo-psych in it.

He must go to even greater lengths to secure a partner (it’s possible just unreasonably steep) while attractive men are basically handed it

So that’s a really gross way of putting that. In a number of ways. But, like, look at it on its own terms. Attractive men are ‘handed’ sex. Presumably freely and by choice. K. So, what’s an incel to do then? Go to greater lengths apparently. You ain’t slick muffuga, we see you…

Donate to the Mammoth!

We Hunted the Mammoth is an ad-free, reader-supported publication written and published by longtime journalist David Futrelle, who has been tracking, dissecting, and mocking the growing misogynistic backlash since 2010, exposing the hateful ideologies of Men’s Rights Activists, incels, alt-rightists and many others.

We depend on support from people like you. Please consider a donation or a monthly pledge by clicking below! there's no need for a PayPal account.

Send comments, questions, and tips for stories to me at dfutrelle@gmail.com, or by clicking here